High burden of clonal mast cell disorders and hereditary α-tryptasemia in patients who need Hymenoptera venom immunotherapy.

BACKGROUND: In patients who require venom immunotherapy (VIT), there is a need to identify underlying mast cell (MC) disorders since these may affect the risk and severity of future sting reactions and the long-term effectiveness of VIT. METHODS: 1319 individuals with Hymenoptera venom allergy (HVA) who needed VIT from referral centers in Slovenia, Austria, Croatia, and Poland underwent examination for KIT p.D816V in peripheral blood leukocytes (PBL) using a highly sensitive PCR test and tryptase genotyping by digital droplet PCR. We also included 183 control individuals with large local reactions (LLRs) to Hymenoptera stings and with asymptomatic sensitization to Hymenoptera venoms. RESULTS: 285 of 1319 individuals recommended for VIT (21.6%) were positive for KIT p.D816V in PBL, preferably those who present with severe reaction (33.9% [n = 207 of 610] with Ring-Messmer grade 3-4 vs. 11% [n = 78 of 709] with Grade 1-2; p < .0001), whereas only 1.3% (n = 2 of 152) of controls with LLR and none with asymptomatic sensitization (n = 31) had KIT p.D816V. KIT p.D816V allelic burden was higher in those with severe reaction (median 0.018% [n = 207] in Grade 3-4 vs. 0.001% [n = 78] in Grade 1-2; p < .0001), and the majority had normal baseline serum tryptase levels (69% [n = 196 of 285]). All KIT p.D816V-positive individuals (n = 41) who underwent bone marrow (BM) biopsy were found to have underlying clonal diseases, principally BM mastocytosis. HαT was also associated with severe HVA and symptoms (p < .01), and remarkably, 31.0% (n = 31 of 100) were found to have concomitant KIT p.D816V. Concomitant HαT and KIT p.D816V showed an additive effect, and having both was associated with the highest risk for severe HVA, even higher than having either HαT or KIT p.D816V alone (OR = 3.8; p < .01). CONCLUSIONS: By employing prospective universal tryptase genotyping and examination for KIT p.D816V in PBL in large HVA populations, we have demonstrated a high burden of clonal MC disorders and HαT in patients who require VIT.

[Hereditary angioedema due to C1-inhibitor deficiency, a national disease management programme]. / Hereditäres Angioödem durch C1-Inhibitor-Mangel, eine nationale Versorgungsleitlinie.

Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is a rare, painful, disabling and potentially fatal disease, where early diagnosis and effective treatment are critical. These Austrian guidelines for the diagnosis and management of HAE provide instructions and advice on the state of the art management of HAE in Austria in contrast to global guidelines, where the situation of all countries worldwide must be taken into account. Our goal is to help Austrian physicians to consider HAE as a differential diagnosis with corresponding symptoms, to make rational decisions for the diagnosis and management of HAE with C1-inhibitor deficiency (type 1 or type 2). The guidelines provide information on common and important clinical symptoms, diagnostic methods, treatment modalities, available HAE-specific medications in Austria and last but not least to motivate physicians to refer patients to HAE centers for confirmation of the diagnosis and adequate treatment decisions.

[Recurrent livedo-like skin lesions following a vector-based COVID-19 vaccine]. / Rezidivierende Livedo-artige Hautveränderungen nach einer Vektor-basierten COVID-19-Impfung.

Starting in 2020, the global health system faced unprecedent challenges due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and the consequences are still felt. All the more fascinating and of particular importance for health policy was the development of potent vaccines within about one year by several research groups after the first reports of COVID-19 infections. To date, three types of COVID-19 vaccines are available, i.e., messenger RNA-based vaccines, adenoviral vector vaccines, and inactivated whole-virus vaccines. We report a woman who developed reddish, partially urticarial skin lesions on her right arm and flank shortly after the first dose with the corona vaccination from AstraZeneca/Oxford (ChAdOx1). The lesions were transient, however reoccurred in loco and at other locations over several days. The clinical presentation was unusual and was correctly assigned due to the clinical course.

Molecular allergy diagnosis is sensitive and avoids misdiagnosis in patients sensitized to seasonal allergens.

BACKGROUND: The specificity of extract-based pollen allergy diagnosis is decreased due to cross-reactivity via cross-reactive carbohydrate determinants (CCDs) or panallergens such as profilins or polcalcins. This study aimed to explore the prevalence of sensitization to seasonal extracts, CCDs, profilin and polcalcin and investigate the sensitivity and specificity of seasonal molecular allergy diagnosis (MAD) using commercially available test methods. METHODS: 2948 patients were screened for specific immunoglobulin E to ash, birch, mugwort, ragweed and timothy grass pollen extracts and grouped according to the number of positive tests (1-5). 100 patients from each group and a control group were randomly selected to calculate the prevalence of CCD and panallergen sensitization. With 742 patients, sensitivity and specificity of MAD (Alt a 1, Fra/Ole e 1, Bet v 1, Phl p 1, Art v 1, and Amb a 1) was determined. RESULTS: 1627 patients (55.2%) were positive to at least one, and 1002 patients (34.0%) were positive to multiple of the five pollen allergens investigated; 18.5% of the pollen-sensitized patients had sensitization to CCDs or panallergens. Specifically, sensitization to CCDs, profilins, and polcalcins was observed in 8.7%, 10.9%, and 2.9% of these patients, respectively. The sensitivity of MAD was high, with sensitivities between 96.2% and 100% using ImmunoCAP and 91.5% and 100% using ALEX2 . Specificity was 100% for both assays. CONCLUSIONS: Due to cross-reactivity, about one-fifth of pollen-sensitized patients is at risk of misdiagnosis. However, MAD is sensitive, specific and helps to avoid misdiagnosis and select primary allergen sources for immunotherapy.

Itch in Hymenoptera Sting Reactions.

Insect stings and the resulting itch are a ubiquitous problem. Stings by members of the insect order Hymenoptera, which includes sawflies, wasps, bees and ants, and especially by bees and wasps are extremely common, with 56-94% of the population being stung at least once in their lifetime. The complex process of venom activity and inflammation causes local reactions with pain and pruritus, sometimes anaphylactic reactions and more seldomly, as in case of numerous stings, systemic intoxication. We reviewed the literature regarding itch experienced after Hymenoptera stings, but found no study that placed a specific focus on this topic. Hymenoptera venoms are composed of many biologically active substances, including peptide toxins and proteinaceous toxins. Peptide toxins from bee venom cause cell lysis and ion channel modulation in the peripheral and central nervous systems, while toxins from wasp venom induce mast cell degranulation and chemotaxis of polymorphonuclear leukocytes in the skin. The proteinaceous toxins cause a disruption of the cell membranes and necrotic cell death, degradation of hyaluronan (an extracellular matrix glycosaminoglycan), increased vascular permeability, hemolysis, as well as activated platelet aggregation. Mediators which could be directly involved in the venom-induced pruritus include histamine and tryptase released from mast cells, interleukin-4 and interleukin-13 from Th2 lymphocytes, as well as leukotriene C4. We postulate that a pruriceptive itch is induced due to the pharmacological properties of Hymenoptera venoms.

Large local reactions and systemic reactions to insect stings: Similarities and differences.

BACKGROUND: Large local reactions (LLR) to Hymenoptera stings were considered as IgE-mediated late-phase inflammatory reactions. However, in older studies, most patients with LLR were skin test positive, but only around 50% had detectable sIgE determined by the RAST system. METHODS: Data of 620 patients were evaluated retrospectively: 310 patients who suffered from LLR and 310 patients with previous systemic sting reactions (SSR). We aimed to clarify if sIgE can generally be detected by the CAP system in patients with LLR; sIgE levels and clinical parameters were compared between patients with LLR and SSR. RESULTS: Positive sIgE levels were detected in 80.7% of patients with LLR, and in 95.2% of patients with SSR (p<0.001). Of the 310 patients with LLR, 80.6% had a LLR with a size of 10-20cm, whereas 19.4% had swellings >20cm, with a mean duration of seven days. In only 2.9% of patients, LLRs occurred after stings on the trunk, while 14.8% of SSR resulted from stings on this site (p<0.001). Similarly, LLR were also less frequent on the capillitium compared to SSR (8.1% versus 26.2%; p = 0.035). CONCLUSIONS: LLR usually persisted over seven days and about one fifth of patients had swellings greater than 20cm. Contrary to SSR, LLR were less frequently observed on the capillitium and on the trunk. In most patients with LLR, sIgE could be detected. However, total IgE and sIgE levels to bee or vespid venom did not differ between patients with LLR and SSR.